DOCSLIB.ORG

Prison Sentences and Time Served for Violence

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Prison Sentences and Time Served for Violence U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Selected Findings Number 4 Prison Sentences and April 1995, NCJ-153858 Time Served for Violence By Lawrence A. Greenfeld finding that just under half the sentence will be served in BJS Statistician confinement was confirmed through analysis of self-reports of a national sample of State prisoners. An examination of Since the mid-1970's, legislatures around the Nation have prison release practices for violent offenders in 31 States sought to reduce discretion in both the sentencing process reveals wide disparity across the States in sentence length and the determination of when the conditions of a sentence but substantially less disparity and greater consensus on have been satisfied. Determinate sentencing, use of man- the duration of time spent in confinement. datory minimums, and guidelines-based sentencing are il- lustrations of approaches that limit discretion and increase These findings are drawn from BJS data collection pro- the predictability of penalties. grams, including the annual National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP) and the 1991 sample survey of State A majority of State prisoners today serve presumptive sen- prisoners. (See Sources of data, page 3.) tences 90% of State inmates can estimate their prob- able release date, and their discharge from prison is less Admissions, releases, and prisoners present likely than in the past to be determined by a parole board decision. In 1977, 72% of those released from State pris- Prison releases ons had served an indeterminate sentence, and a parole board decided their release. In 1992, by contrast, less than Participating NCRP States, representing about 8 out of 10 40% of prison releases were determined by a parole board. violent offenders released from prisons nationwide in 1992, provided sufficient information to examine the relationship Interest in truth-in-sentencing reflects continued attention between the sentence received and time served prior to to discretion and to the relation between sentences and first release. time served. Truth-in-sentencing is generally meant to describe a close correspondence between the sentence Released violent offenders in 1992 served imposed upon those sent to prison and the time actually 48% of their sentence served prior to prison release. Average Percent of Average time sentence Type of offense sentence served* served Data collected from States by the Bureau of Justice Statis- All violent 89 months 43 months 48% tics (BJS) indicate that violent offenders released from Homicide 149 71 48 State prisons in 1992 served 48% of the sentence they had Rape 117 65 56 received an average of 43 months in confinement, both Kidnaping 104 52 50 jail and prison, on an average sentence of 89 months. The Robbery 95 44 46 Sexual assault 72 35 49 Violent offenders are persons convicted of homicide, kidnaping, Assault 61 29 48 forcible rape, sexual assault, robbery, assault, or other crimes Other 60 28 47 involving the threat or imposition of harm upon the victim, in- cluding extortion, intimidation, reckless endangerment, hit-and- *Includes jail credit and prison time. run driving with injury, or child abuse. Little variability was found in the percentage of sentence serve. During the course of a prison stay, various credits served for different types of violent crimes. For most vio- against a sentence may be earned (such as good time) or lent crimes, offenders served just under half of the sen- reductions in sentence length may occur (such as sentence tence imposed. Those convicted of rape were found to rollbacks in crowding emergencies), changing the percent- serve the highest percentage of their sentences, 56%. age of sentence actually served. Prison releases Average Average Percent of Prisoner status sentence time served sentence Percent of Average Average sentence Admissions, 1992 104 months 62 months 60% Years sentence time served served Prisoners, 1991 216 100 46 1988 95 months 41 months 43% Releases, 1992 89 43 48 1989 91 42 46 1990 94 44 47 Estimating hypothetical impacts of changing 1991 92 44 48 the percentage of sentence served 1992 89 43 48 Thinking about truth-in-sentencing requires at least the During the most recent 5-year period, data for released vio- knowledge of two numbers sentence length and the ac- lent offenders indicated that the percentage of their sen- tual or predicted length of stay. Since the desired goal of tence spent in prison remained relatively stable. truth-in-sentencing is to increase the percentage of sen- tence served over current practice, it is possible to estimate Prison admissions what sentences and what time served would be necessary to achieve increased correspondence between the two. Another measure of the time served relative to a sentence Such estimates would, of course, be speculative because is derived from those admitted to prison. NCRP obtains policies or practices implemented by jurisdictions seeking estimates of the minimum time to be served by those to change the percentage of sentence served may simulta- admitted to State prisons. From 1988 to 1992, sentences neously modify both sentence length and time served. received and preliminary estimates of length of stay for violent offenders admitted to State prisons have shown If the current average sentence remained the same for vio- a consistent percentage of the sentence to be served: lent offenders and a policy were adopted requiring that 85% of the current sentence should be served, the predicted Prison admissions time served would increase the current length of stay Percent of for admissions, 26 months Average Average time sentence to Years sentence to be served be served for prisoners present, 84 months 1988 113 months 66 months 58% for releases, an average 33 months longer in prison. 1989 107 65 61 1990 105 63 60 Based upon current sentences, what would time 1991 105 64 61 served in prison be if violent offenders served higher 1992 104 62 60 percentages of the sentences they had received? Admissions in 1992 had average sentences of 104 months, Estimated time to serve and correctional authorities predicted that they would stay Percent of Prison Prisoners Prison for 60% of that time. Releases that same year had average sentence served admissions present releases sentences that were 15 months shorter and their length of Current 62 months 100 months 43 months stay was 19 months less; releases served 48% of the sen- 65% 68 140 58 tences they received. 70% 73 151 62 75% 78 162 67 Estimated percentage of sentence served or to be served by admitted, current, and released prisoners 80% 83 173 71 85% 88 184 76 Prisoner self-reports and records obtained for those re- 90% 94 194 80 leased from prison tell a similar story just under half the 95% 99 205 85 sentence received will be served in confinement. Estimates 100% 104 216 89 for admissions, however, may differ from the other esti- mates for two reasons: admissions reflect current policies and legislation affecting the use of prison, and less is known at admission about how long inmates will actually 2 Prison releases Based upon current time served in prison, what would sentences need to be to achieve higher percentages States with a Percent of percent of sen- Average Average time sentence of sentence served? tence served sentence served served Estimated sentence Above average 72 months 44 months 61% Percent of Prison Prisoners Prison Average 102 47 46 sentence served admissions present releases Below average 125 42 34 Current 104 months 216 months 89 months 65% 95 154 66 These data indicate that all three groupings of States had 70% 89 143 61 similar time served among violent offenders released from prison regardless of the sentence received or the percent- 75% 83 133 57 age of sentence served. In other words, States have a 80% 78 125 54 much greater consensus on the duration of incarceration 85% 73 118 51 for violent crime than could be inferred from simply examin- 90% 69 111 48 ing the sentences imposed or the percentage of sentence 95% 65 105 45 served. 100% 62 100 43 Sources of data An alternate approach would be to hold constant the cur- In 1992, 38 States and the District of Columbia participated rent average lengths of stay and change sentence lengths, in the National Corrections Reporting Program, covering attempting to ensure a particular ratio of time served to 93% of State prison admissions nationwide (431,000 re- sentence. As shown above, by setting the sentence as cords) and 86% of State prison releases (348,000 records). 85% of the current time served, estimated sentence lengths While the length of the sentence received was gathered would decrease for both groups of prisoners, time served (including jail for admissions, 31 months credits) was only obtainable for those released from prison. for prisoners present, 98 months For those admitted to prisons in 1992, States provided a for releases, an average 38 months. prediction of the expected minimum time to be served. How States differ in the percentage of sentence served In 1991 BJS conducted a representative sample survey of State prisoners and obtained estimates from prisoners of Among the NCRP States, released violent offenders in the likely time to be served. Approximately 14,000 inmate 1992 had an average sentence of 89 months and an aver- interviews were conducted in 45 States. age time served of 43 months; these violent prisoners had served 48% of their sentence prior to discharge from The categorization of violent offenses is the same for both prison. The reporting jurisdictions can be divided into three the NCRP and the survey of State prisoners. Beginning in groups according to whether they were above, at, or below 1982, a three-digit offense coding system was devised by the national average percentage of sentence served.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lifetime Likelihood of Victimization
    U. S. Department of Justice I Bureau of Justice Statistics I Lifetime Likelihood of Victimization by Herbert Koppel people's perception of the meaning of BJS Analyst March 1987 annual rates with respect to their own The Bureau of Justice Statistics lives. If the Earth revolved around the This report provides estimates of the National Crime Survey provides sun in 180 days, all of our annual crime likelihood that a person will become a annual victimization rates based rates would be halved, but we would not victim of crime during his or her life- on counts of the number of crimes be safer. time, or that a household will be vic- reported and not reported to timized during a 20-year period. This police in the United States. These Calculating lifetime victimization rates contrasts with the conventional use of a rates are based on interviews 1-year period in measuring crime and twice a year with about 101,000 For this report, lifetime likelihoods criminal victimization. Most promi- persons in approximately 49,000 of victimization were calculated from nently, the National Crime Survey nationally representative NCS annual victimization rates and life (NCS) surveys a sample of U.S. house- households. Those annual rates, tables published by the National Center holds and publishes annual victimization while of obvious utility to for Health statistics.% The probability rates, and the FBI's Uniform Crime policymakers, researchers, and that a person will be victimized at a Reports (UCR) provide annual rates of statisticians, do not convey to particular age basically depends upon crimes reported to the police.
    [Show full text]
  • Youth Crime Drop Youth DECEMBER 2000 URBAN INSTITUTE Justice Policy Center
    R E P O R T December 2000 URBAN INSTITUTE Justice Policy Center Jeffrey A. Butts research for safer communities Youth Crime Drop DECEMBER 2000 URBAN INSTITUTE Justice Policy Center Youth Crime Drop Summary Researchers debate why violent crime in the United States suddenly dropped in the 1990s, but one fact all researchers endorse is that the overall decline in violent crime probably had much to do with falling rates of youth crime. This brief report from the Justice Policy Center examines the recent crime drop and asks how much of the decrease seen between 1995 and 1999 can be attributed to juveniles (under age 18) and older youth (ages 18 to 24). Using the most recent data from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports, the analysis demonstrates that not only did America’s violent crime drop continue through 1999, falling youth crime accounted for most of the overall decline. The Author Jeffrey A. Butts (Ph.D., University of Michigan) is a senior research associate with the Urban Institute’s Justice Policy Center, where he is involved in research and evaluation projects on Published by policies and programs for youthful offenders, including federally funded evaluations of teen Justice Policy Center courts and juvenile drug courts. Prior to joining the Urban Institute in 1997, he was a senior URBAN INSTITUTE research associate at the National Center for Juvenile Justice. 2100 M Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20037 The Urban Institute Copyright Ó 2000 The Urban Institute is a nonprofit policy research organization established in Washington, D.C., in 1968. The Institute's goals are to sharpen thinking about society's problems and efforts to solve them, improve government decisions and their implementation, and increase citizens' Any opinions expressed are awareness about important public choices.
    [Show full text]
  • Police Crime Statistics 2019
    1 The number of the following offences increased: I. General information on police crime statistics II. Crime trends in 2019 – sexual abuse of children by 10.9 % to 13,670 cases (PCS) 1. In general (2018: 12,321 cases) 1. Importance The total number of recorded criminal offences decreased by – computer fraud (sect. 263a PC) by 12.1 % to 100,814 cases Police crime statistics serve to 2.1 % compared to the previous year (2019: 5.436m cases, 2018: (2018: 89,901 cases) 5.556m cases). The total number of recorded criminal offences – dissemination of writings depicting pornography by 51.6 % to – monitor crime and individual types of offences, the size and excluding offences against foreigners’ law decreased by 2.3 % 17,336 cases (2018: 11,435 cases) composition of the circle of suspects and fluctuations in crime compared to the previous year (2019: 5.271m cases, 2018: 5.392m 6. Offences by type as % of total offences (5,436,401 cases) rates, cases). – gather information for law enforcement purposes, for organisa- 2. Clear-up rate (CR) tional planning and decision-making and to The total clear-up rate is 57.5 %/56.2 % (2018: 57.7 %/56.5 %). The offences against theft without – carry out socio-criminological research, criminal police and other offences life aggravating CR for murder and manslaughter is particularly high at 94.0 %, as 19.7% preventive measures. 0.1% circumstances is the case with regard to crimes related to services, especially fare 18.9% 2. Content evasion 98.9 % and social benefits fraud 99.2 %.
    [Show full text]
  • Crime in New York State 2019 Final Data
    December 2020 New York State Crime Report Andrew M. Cuomo Michael C. Green Governor Executive Deputy Commissioner December 2020 Crime in New York State 2019 Final Data New York State and the FBI use seven Index crime categories as indicators of overall crime trends: murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault, which are classified as violent crimes; and the property crimes of burglary, larceny and motor vehicle theft. The FBI created these categories to allow for uniform crime reporting across all 50 states. This report details 2019 Index crime in New York State, its 62 counties and two regions: New York City and the 57 counties outside of the five boroughs (Rest of State). Police departments and sheriffs’ offices report Index crime to the Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) through the Uniform Crime Reporting and Incident-Based Reporting programs. This report also details Index crime rates per 100,000 population statewide and by county and region. DCJS uses county population data from the FBI, which is based on U.S. Census estimates, to calculate those crime rates. New York State implemented the FBI’s expanded Reported Index crime in New York State declined for the definition of rape in 2015; this resulted in an uptick seventh consecutive year in 2019, with 335,736 Index in violent crime and reported rapes in that year crimes reported. This is the fewest number of crimes when compared to prior years. As a result, caution reported since statewide reporting began in 1975. should be used when citing or interpreting any percentage changes between rapes reported in The historic low in reported Index crime has resulted in 2015 and any subsequent year, to those reported New York’s Index crime rate declining by 25.8 percent in 2014 and earlier.
    [Show full text]
  • Violent Crime in the United States
    U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Violent Crime in the United States ent victimization, 1973-89 'sons age 12 and older _~_ Assault Robbery Rape 1981 1985 0' 1977 1989 -- & a Itin" Criminal Victimization 1989, October 1990. - Bureau of Justice Statistics Female victims of violent crime, Law enforcement management Drugs & crime data: NCJ-127187,1/91 reports State drug resources: A national directory, Redesign of the National Crime Survey, BJS bulletins and special reports: Police departments In large cities, 1987, NCJ·122582,5/90 (Revised January 19~1) NCJ·111457,3/89 Federal drug data for national policy, NCJ· Th'il seasonality 01 crime vlcllmizallon, NCJ-119220, 8/89 Profile of state and local law enforcement 122715,4/90 Call toll·free 800·732·3277 (local 301- N CJ·l11 033, 6/88 agencies, NCJ·113949, 3/89 Drugs and crime facts, 1989, NCJ·121022, 251-5500) to order BJS reports, to be Crime and older Americans Information package, NCJ-l04569, $10, 5/87 1/90 added to one of the BJS mailing lists, Expenditure and employment or to speak to a reference specialist In Teenage victims, NCJ.l03138, 12186 Victimization and fear of crime: World Computer crime statistics at the Justice Statistics BJS bulletins: perspectives, NCJ·93872, 1/85, $9.15 Justice expenditure and employment: BJS special reports: Clearinghouse, National Criminal The Nallonal Crime Survey: Working papers, 19B8, NCJ-123132, 7190 Electronic fund transfer fraud, NCJ·96666, Justice Reference Service, Box 6000, vol. I: Current and historical perspectives, 1985, NCJ·104460, 3/87 3/85 Rockville, MD 20850.
    [Show full text]
  • Police Crime Statistics 2019
    1 The number of the following offences increased: I. General information on police crime statistics II. Crime trends in 2018 – offences against the Weapons Act by 5.5 % to 40,104 cases (PCS) 1. In general (2017: 38,001 cases) 1. Importance The total number of recorded criminal offences decreased by – drug offences by 6.1 % to 350,662 cases Police crime statistics serve to 3.6 % compared to the previous year (2018: 5.556m cases, 2017: (2017: 330,580 cases) 5.762m cases). The total number of recorded criminal offences – dissemination of writings depicting pornography by 13.6 % to – monitor crime and individual types of offences, the size and excluding offences against foreigners law decreased by 3.4 % 11,435 cases (2017: 10,066 cases) composition of the circle of suspects and fluctuations in crime compared to the previous year (2018: 5.392m cases, 2017: 5.582m 6. Offences by type as % of total offences (5,555,520 cases) rates, cases). – gather information for law enforcement purposes, for organisa- 2. Clear-up rate (CR) tional planning and decision-making and to theft without offences against other offences aggravating life 0.1% 19.5% circumstances – carry out socio-criminological research, criminal police and The total clear-up rate is 57.7 %/56.5 % (2017: 57.1 %/55.7 %). The 19.5% preventive measures. CR for murder and manslaughter is particularly high at 96.1 %, as is the case with regard to crimes related to services, especially fare offences against 2. Content evasion 99.1 % and social benefits fraud 99.2 %.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigating Violent Crime: the Prosecuter's Role
    Investigating Violent Crime: The Prosecuter’s Role Lessons Learned From the Field June 2018 This publication is funded through a cooperative agreement with the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Neither the U.S. Department of Justice nor any of its components operate, control, are responsible for, or necessarily endorse, this publication (including, without limitation, its content, and policies, and any services or tools provided). This project was supported by Grant No. 2016-MU-BX-K005 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, the Office for Victims of Crime, and the SMART Office. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Table of Contents Acknowledgments 1 Introduction 2 Initial Investigation 3 Absolute vs. Qualified Immunity 3 Vertical Prosecution 3 General 3 Examples 3 Prosecutors and the Crime Scene 4 General 4 Prosecutor Crime Scene Training for Police 6 General 6 Examples 6 Legal Advice During the Investigative Stage 6 General 6 Examples 6 Statements From Suspects – Prosecutor Involvement 6 General 6 Examples 7 Witness Cooperation and Intimidation 7 General 7 Examples 8 Confidential Informants 10 Examples
    [Show full text]
  • Violent Crimes in Aid of Racketeering 18 U.S.C. § 1959 a Manual for Federal Prosecutors
    Violent Crimes in Aid of Racketeering 18 U.S.C. § 1959 A Manual for Federal Prosecutors December 2006 Prepared by the Staff of the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20005 (202) 514-3594 Frank J. Marine, Consultant Douglas E. Crow, Principal Deputy Chief Amy Chang Lee, Assistant Chief Robert C. Dalton Merv Hamburg Gregory C.J. Lisa Melissa Marquez-Oliver David J. Stander Catherine M. Weinstock Cover Design by Linda M. Baer PREFACE This manual is intended to assist federal prosecutors in the preparation and litigation of cases involving the Violent Crimes in Aid of Racketeering Statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1959. Prosecutors are encouraged to contact the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section (OCRS) early in the preparation of their case for advice and assistance. All pleadings alleging a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1959 including any indictment, information, or criminal complaint, and a prosecution memorandum must be submitted to OCRS for review and approval before being filed with the court. The submission should be approved by the prosecutor’s office before being submitted to OCRS. Due to the volume of submissions received by OCRS, prosecutors should submit the proposal three weeks prior to the date final approval is needed. Prosecutors should contact OCRS regarding the status of the proposed submission before finally scheduling arrests or other time-sensitive actions relating to the submission. Moreover, prosecutors should refrain from finalizing any guilty plea agreement containing a Section 1959 charge until final approval has been obtained from OCRS. The policies and procedures set forth in this manual and elsewhere relating to 18 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Examining Crime Hotspots in Chicago Using Bayesian Statistics
    Examining Crime Hotspots in Chicago Using Bayesian Statistics Abstract Chicago currently leads the United States with the greatest number of homicides and violent crimes in recent years. Using police data from the City of Chicago’s Data Portal, we examined crime hot spots in Chicago and whether crime rates differ by geographic and demographic information. In general, we found that crime rate in Chicago has decreased between 2010 and 2015, though the rates differed between violent and non-violent crimes. Change in crime rate also varied geographically. We found that for areas with lower white populations, crime decreased as income rose. For areas with larger non-white populations, crime rate increased as income increased 1 1 Introduction Chicago currently leads the United States with the greatest number of homicides and violent crimes in recent years. In 2016, the number of homicides in Chicago increased 58% from the year before (Ford, 2017). Using police data from the City of Chicago’s Data Portal, we examined crime hot spots in Chicago and whether crime rates differ by geographic and demographic information. In this report, we defined hot spots as zipcodes with greater increases, or smaller decreases, in crime rates over time relative to other zipcodes in Chicago. In addition, we examined hot spots for both violent and non-violent crimes. Understanding crime hot spots can prove advantageous to law enforcement as they can better understand crime trends and create crime management strategies accordingly (Law, et al. 2014). A common approach to defining crime hot spots uses crime density. Thus, hot spots by this definition are areas with high crime rates that are also surrounded by other high-crime areas for one time period.
    [Show full text]
  • GUN VIOLENCE in CHICAGO, 2016 GUN VIOLENCE in CHICAGO, 2016 January 2017 University of Chicago Crime Lab1
    GUN VIOLENCE IN CHICAGO, 2016 GUN VIOLENCE IN CHICAGO, 2016 January 2017 University of Chicago Crime Lab1 Acknowledgments: The University of Chicago Crime Lab is a privately-funded, independent, non-partisan academic research center founded in 2008 to help cities identify the most effective and humane ways to control crime and violence, and reduce the harms associated with the administration of criminal justice. We are grateful to the Chicago Police Department for making available the data upon which this report is based, to Ben Hansen for help assembling data on Chicago weather patterns, and to Aaron Chalfin, Philip Cook, Aurélie Ouss, Harold Pollack, and Shari Runner for valuable comments. We thank the Joyce Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the McCormick Foundation, and the Pritzker Foundation for support of the University of Chicago Crime Lab and Urban Labs, as well as Susan and Tom Dunn, and Ira Handler. All opinions and any errors are our own and do not necessarily reflect those of our funders or of any government agencies. 1 This report was produced by Max Kapustin, Jens Ludwig, Marc Punkay, Kimberley Smith, Lauren Speigel, and David Welgus, with the invaluable assistance of Roseanna Ander, Nathan Hess, and Julia Quinn. Please direct any comments and questions to [email protected]. 2 INTRODUCTION A total of 764 people were murdered in Chicago in 2016. They were sons, brothers, and fathers; sisters, daughters, and mothers; they were, as the title of The New York Times reporter Fox Butterfield’s book on urban violence noted,All God’s Children.
    [Show full text]
  • Talking Helps: Information for Victims of Sexual Assault
    Talking Helps: Information for Victims of Sexual Assault Sexual assaults are serious, violent and frightening crimes directed against women, men and children. According to Montana Law, sexual assault occurs when a person knowingly subjects another person to any sexual contact without consent. Sexual assaults disrupt the lives of many people, not only victims but also those who fear becoming victims. Sexual assault creates psychological trauma for victims and those around them, and often limits women's mobility and therefore their freedom. All must share the concern for this crime and efforts to eliminate it. FACTS ABOUT SEXUAL ASSAULT Facts about sexual assault often have not been accurately reported in our society. Most people have grown up with a variety of false beliefs about sexual assault. These beliefs have been handed down from generation to generation through individual interaction, media (movies, TV, magazines and books), religious beliefs and through a lack of education on the subject. It has only been in the last ten years that people started studying sexual assault and finding that most ideas about sexual assault that have existed for centuries are wrong. These false beliefs have many negative effects on the victim in particular. Many sexual assault victims feel shame and guilt because of society's false beliefs and, as a result, only 1/5 to 1/10 seek the help they need or tell anyone what has happened. These false beliefs also result in low conviction rates of offenders. And finally, these false ideas contribute to sexual assault in our society by not recognizing the offender as responsible for his or her behavior.
    [Show full text]
  • Protesters, Extortion, and Coercion: Preventing RICO from Chilling First Amendment Freedoms Brian J
    Notre Dame Law Review Volume 75 | Issue 2 Article 6 12-1-1999 Protesters, Extortion, and Coercion: Preventing RICO from Chilling First Amendment Freedoms Brian J. Murray Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr Recommended Citation Brian J. Murray, Protesters, Extortion, and Coercion: Preventing RICO from Chilling First Amendment Freedoms, 75 Notre Dame L. Rev. 691 (1999). Available at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr/vol75/iss2/6 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Notre Dame Law Review by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOTE PROTESTERS, EXTORTION, AND COERCION: PREVENTING RICO FROM CHILLING FIRST AMENDMENT FREEDOMS Brian j Murray* The claim that the expressions were intended to exercise a coercive im- pact... does not remove them from the reach of the First Amendment.1 [N]o one really knows a law thoroughly unless he knows what the courts 2 have made of it. I. INTRODUCTION In the tradition of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Americans who disagree with the practices of others have a Constitutional right to protest. Through such protest they can attempt, with zeal, to per- suade those who engage in such practices to change their ways. Under the jurisprudence of the United States Supreme Court such protest activity does not fall outside of the protection of the First Amendment "simply because it may embarrass others or coerce them into action."3 * Candidate forJuris Doctor, Notre Dame Law School, 2000; B.S., University of Notre Dame, 1997.
    [Show full text]